Since the dawn of humanity, members of our species have gathered together into huddled, shivering masses to fight off marauding predators and create economies of scale which enabled them to develop the arts, trade and complex social structures. The weight of evidence suggests a generally steady progression in the development and complexity of such sociological phenomenon. Occasionally a odd voice in the wilderness has questioned whether we, as a species, should reconsider the wisdom of this upward progression. These voices have generally been marginalized and considered heretical.
For an equally long time, small minorities of people gathered in small clusters to live out alternative lives, away from the tribal elites and their web of social institutions which bound its members into passive worker bees. These small groups took many forms and names over the ages: the Essenes, monastic orders, kibbutzim, communes. I'm speaking mainly here of Western influences but, obviously, Eastern mores often followed this direction in an even more pronounced fashion. While these various groups espoused a broad spectrum of political, religious and philosophical reasons for their behavior and their stated aims, the means they chose to meet those ends are startlingly similar to one another.
Members of such groups mainly swore off earthly pleasures, such as sexual relations, wealth creation and participation in the wider society. What brought such a diverse group of people, in various eras, to the same lifestyle and regimen?
It sounds compelling, this life. However, there is also the dark side. I seem to remember that Pol Pot was all about helping get out of the "decadent" cities for a simpler life. Look where that got the Cambodians.
0 comments:
Post a Comment